[pdal] Pipeline XML as primary channel?

[Michael P. Gerlek]

If we're going to push the xml a little further, I'd be inclined to relax my
initial position that it needed to be read/written via the ptree xml
serializer.

I had the idea that we could serialize as json, etc, too, but I think it is
more important that we have flexible XML reading/writing (such as using
attributes and supporting xsd validation and such).

-mpg


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard Butler [mailto:hobu.inc at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 2:03 PM
> To: mpg at flaxen.com
> Cc: 'Pete Gadomski'; pdal at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [pdal] Pipeline XML as primary channel?
> 
> 
> On Aug 17, 2011, at 5:40 PM, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> 
> >> `//Filter[@type="filters.reprojection"]` seems cleaner than
> >> `//Filter/Type[text()="filters.reprojection"/..`.
> >
> > Wow, they both just look like so much @$#^@%$//! line noise to me...
> > :-)
> >
> >> * <opinion>Attributes work well for atomic values e.g. driver types
> >> and option names.</opinion>
> >
> > <opinion assertedas="fact">Agreed.</opinion>
> >
> >> <WriterPipeline>
> >>    <Writer type="drivers.oci.writer">
> >>        <Option name="debug">true</Option>
> >>        <Reader type="drivers.las.reader">
> >>            <Option name="filename">in.las</Option>
> >>        </Reader>
> >>    </Writer>
> >> </WriterPipeline>
> >
> > Yup, that's basically what I had when I started the project -- but
> > then I found out that boost::property_tree doesn't serialize to XML
> > attrs quite as cleanly as I'd like.  I'm going to revisit that issue
> > this afternoon, I think.
> 
> I agree that our pipeline XML isn't optimal, and we should move it toward
> something sane earlier rather than later.  Pete, when you get some time,
can
> you help me cook up an XSD that we can use to externally validate our
> pipelines?  I'll work to implement it.
> 
> Howard=